Re: [ws-sx] Should we cancel the WSSX TC call this week.

[Kelvin Lawrence <klawrenc@us.ibm.com>]

Thanks Rich

I thought all wee needed was the cover
page changed to Committee Draft but thanks for being thorough. Given this
is an examples doc maybe we don't need to do that. Thanks for checking.

Cheers
Kelvin

From:	"Rich.Levinson" <rich.levinson@oracle.com>
To:	Kelvin Lawrence/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "ws-sx >> \"ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org\"" <ws-sx@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:	03/30/2009 03:14 PM
Subject:	Re: [ws-sx] Should we cancel the WSSX TC call this week.

---

Hi Kelvin,

I know I've slipped on this, but I am still expecting to get it tomorrow
night. It's simply that things have been very busy - I took a look at it
and do not think there are any significant changes except I have become
aware of the need for a conformance section:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/QAChecklistV2.html

Conformance Section

All specifications are now required to contain a Conformance Statement, which should be the last numbered section in the specification immediately preceding Appendix A. The OASIS Technical Advisory Board (TAB) has created a set of guidelines for use by Technical Committees in writing Conformance Statements and Clauses.

   Thanks,
  Rich

Kelvin Lawrence wrote:
Hi everyone. I don't think we have any urgent items for the agenda this
week. I'm still waiting on the edited examples doc so I can notify the
OASIS Staff formally but I can do that off-line. Otherwise I think things
are fairly quiet.

Unless anyone objects your chairs plan to cancel this weeks WSSX call.
I'll wait until 9am EDT Tuesday before cancelling the call to give folks
in all countries a chance to reply.

No response == cancel the call :-)

Cheers
Kelvin